Hmm..Excellent to have this thread and analyse the things from a saner perspective. I think the attacks were a major gambit of Paki army to steady the sinking ship by creating a villain against which the qaum could unite. I believe through this entire attention will now be on India and Paikstan rather than the Taliban which will soon establish a caliphate and may get access to a Jdam/ WMD to be used against us. The things are moving rather quickly for my taste. We will have to fight a war soon and the question is how best to prepare for it. Gurus please provide a cold dissection of this opening salvo of Pakistan in the end game of Pakistan.

At this point, Pakistan seems to have pulled off their blackmail on "moving troops from western borders" and also raised the nuclear bogey - they have also rejected all the evidence that the US/UK seem to have shared with them.

It is not clear that the US will press them any further - while, there's some evidence that the US, China and KSA have pressed upon India to "cool" things.

So, Pakistan at this point does not have to do anything other than to keep stone-walling. The ball, as usual is in India's court - the question is - will India blink again?

NEW DELHI: Pakistan has rejected evidence provided by the US and UK on involvement of its citizens in the Mumbai attacks. It has said the

information provided would not stand scrutiny in any court.

The evidence includes a confession by arrested terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab but Pakistani officials have contended that since it had been obtained by Indians under duress, this could not be admissible in court.

Meanwhile, India kept up the pressure on Pakistan. Foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee said on Sunday that India had not served any ultimatum to Pakistan to take action on terrorists or terror camps. However, India insisted thatPakistan eliminate all terrorist groups from its territory as it had promised.

Addressing a group in Jharkhand, Mukherjee said Pakistan should admit that terrorists involved in the Mumbai attacks came from there. "If all these things are done, then there is no problem at all," he said. "Not once, but twice Pakistan had made a commitment. Once by Musharraf and now by President Zardari. Where is the commitment? Where is the action against terrorists," he added.

Telephone numbers of LeT commanders like Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi and Zarar Shah had been given, reports from Pakistan said, as well as call logs and intercepts. Both US and UK have told Pakistan that India's allegation that the LeT had masterminded the operation was correct.

Officials said US and UK came armed with a much more evidence of Pakistan's complicity than even India had access to. Thanks to their superior tech-int, they gathered more evidence against Pakistan, which, incidentally they did not share with India.

Pakistan's excuse now is that if it's expected to use all this evidence to put people like Lakhvi and Shah on trial, it would need testimonies from Indian witnesses, and all the mobile phones and satphones that were used for evidence.

Evidently, this is a dead end-road. If and when India gives up its own information to Pakistan, it would be met with exactly the same kind of belligerence, say officials.

Within India, though, as more information becomes available, officials are coming round to the view that there was substantial involvement of the army-ISI complex.

"We have evidence and gave the names, not once but ten times. Pakistan had earlier accepted that the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks emanated from there. But now they are contradicting it," Mukherjee said. However, on the Mumbai attacks, he said India would give all information to Pakistan after the investigations were over.

Meanwhile, Mukherjee regretted that Pakistan had gone back on its statement that Maulana Masood Azhar had been detained. He said, "The Pakistani defence minister had earlier said that the Jaish chief was under house arrest. Now some others say he is not in Pakistan. Who is telling the truth? It is Pakistan which has to tell that."

New Delhi: With no concrete outcome from Pakistan on arresting those behind the Mumbai attacks and concerned over Islamabad’s attempts to move troops along the Indo-Pak border, India, too, has started taking the first steps towards beefing up its defences and maintaining a posture that would require “the least time to move into full operational readiness.”

It’s reliably learnt that the political leadership has asked all the three service chiefs not to move out of the country and remain on immediate call. In fact, Navy Chief Admiral Sureesh Mehta was to visit Qatar in mid-December but this was called off after these orders.

Sources said the chiefs have also been advised to pass on similar instructions to their key operational commanders so as to be able to effect “complete readiness” to face any eventuality. At present, the aim is to maintain enhanced operational vigil for which requisite formations in all three forces are on alert.

Troops that were involved in routine exercises or were on operational alert in Punjab and Rajasthan have been asked to stay on well after the duration of these exercises got over this month. No fixed time limit has been given to withdraw with one-third strike elements also being moved in to ensure extra vigil given the unspecified yet alarming reports emerging from Islamabad.

The Defence forces have also been asked to indicate any equipment or ammunition they would need through fast procurement means. While no proposal has so far been received, sources said, each service was still to complete evaluating its immediate requirements.

While India is being careful about not causing unnecessary alarm in Western capitals by amassing troops like in 2002, sources said, the effort is to maintain a more alert posture so that the time taken for full operational readiness is reduced to the minimum. More so, the Army particularly has fine-tuned these aspects of troop deployment after the lessons it drew from Operation Parakaram.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has reviewed defence preparedness twice already since Mumbai, and was briefed on Friday about what the three services have done so far. Broadly, the Government is trying to achieve a delicate balance between not doing anything to fuel the “inappropriate” war hysteria in Pakistan while at the same time stepping up preparedness in what appears to be an unpredictable and deteriorating security environment.

Meanwhile, concerns have grown in Pakistan where Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi called in envoys of key countries posted in Islamabad on Friday to tell them that Pakistan feared a military assault from India. Even though Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad Satyabrata Pal told the Pakistan Foreign Ministry that there was no threatening troop build-up on the Indian side, particularly compared to the disproportionate war propaganda in Pakistan, Islamabad continued feeding the tension to divert focus from the Mumbai investigations.

From an Indian standpoint, sources said, New Delhi has no offensive intent but is well within its right to remain prepared in the light of unprovoked developments in Pakistan and growing hostility in Pakistani military discourse. The Pak Army has already got Washington worried with reports that it has started pulling out some troops from the FATA and NWFP, which is likely to bring more diplomatic pressure on India.

New Delhi, however, is clear that it will continue to press ahead diplomatically and close no option till it sees concrete movement on Mumbai investigations, which would ultimately mean access to those who conceived, planned and executed the Mumbai attack.

Firstly, just calm down. Lots of things are happening behind the scenes and the Mumbai issue is just beginning.

1. US and UK are going through Christmas break right now, therefore there haven't been any high level statements since Dece 20 or so. The bureaucracy is always going to make cliched statements like "Both sides must exhibit restraint" etc.

2. We have some congenitally anti-American commentators like M.K.Bhadrakumar, M.J.Akbar who are trying to score points from the nuclear deal discussion. They are essentially saying "Why hasn't Unkil given ISI chief's head on a platter" which is unrealistic to say the least.

3. Both from open sources and email discussions, it appears that we have had very good help from both the FBI and British authorities in preparing an irrefutable dossier on the LeT connection. TSP papers are reporting that they have been given some of the evidence. Remember that this is an important part of the diplomacy and should not be underestimated.

4. We have engaged several countries not because we are out of options but because we are expecting a follow on attack. We are setting the stage to show that we have gone to the extreme in terms of trying diplomacy. TSP has been warned by China and the Saudis and they cannot ignore that factor. TSP needs a new influx of cash and so far they have not gotten it. I'm not saying that Unkil will be willing to use that card but so far they have not refused to use it. This explains the Zardari speech yesterday.

5. Many of us underestimated the importance to GoI of the J&K elections. There were some serious threats of massive bloodshed and it has been averted. The JeM module that was busted was trying to do a Kaluchak-2.

6. Remember the reports from TSP when John Kerry was there to show that their nukes are safe? Do you know why? Unkil Mullen had warned TSPA that any deployed nukes in the midst of the current crisis and the Talibanization of TSP could force the US to take them out.

With the turn of the year, the activity will pick up again. From the US side, the elected officials will not be coming here because of the change in government but we are likely to see Robert Gates, FBI chief and military officials come here and pressure TSPA.

TSPA and their apologists look at the winter break and smugly express satisfaction at their "tactical victory" but this is not a one month war, is it? They had a game plan for Kargil till May 1999 but were not prepared for July 4th. Then too they caught Indians with the pants down but they had to unstrip their chaddis in front of world media finally.

The wildcard here is the follow on attack. We stopped the JeM "Kaluchak-2" effort in J&K. If we keep doing that, they will end up doing another Mumbai or even a Kargil.

Our powder is dry. Our government is not under any pressure from an election perspective because BJP leadership has rallied behind the government once the seriousness of the threat was seen.

RangduI agree for most part. It does seem that ConGrease government is following the Indira Gandhi 71 style diplomacy. Indira Gandhi did write letters to all the "Great Powers=US, UK, Soviet Union, France, etc" to rein in Pakistan or there is no alternative but war. Lets extend this in current context, Saudi Arabia is roped in with evidence because they are the prime supplier of Oil and Cash to Pakis. If they are on board, you take the sting out of paki comfort zone. British have not forgotten their 7/11 they are more than willing to help in any way possible to ride and avenge the deaths of their citizens. France is already on board, Israel is with us, Russia is trying to become part of this defining moment, china is manouvering behind the scene for better deal where their sphere of influence east of mekong delta is not challenged. They just rec'd a committment from Indian company to supply gas from Mayanmar gas fields. Iran is roped in with tacit understanding from US that Indian base in Iran may be used for supplying US forces via other land route,whilst Iran does not make loud noises about their nuke program. All supplies to US forces can be ferried by Indian Army Vehicles to US forces, making pakistani link up irrelevant.

But we must be careful about our strengths and weakness. We need to plug in all leaks from all sources that may help pakis--that is if this war happens post Jan 20th.

Any kindergarden child will tell us that, given that tsp is sinking, they will use this opportunity to inflict maximum damage to India, before sinking. It is therefore important that India should be prepared for any level of escalation/eventuality. It could be a full fledged war or even a nuclear war. Are we prepared? I guess we need to do a cold calculation without emotions being involved. The cost of a punitive air strike should not compromise 9pc economic growth. One one side I hope MMS & Babus understand all this and are putting a facade of weak knee leadership look or they are infact the week knee leadership. There are subtle indications that it should be the former. May be I am indulging in wishful thinking

RanguduAny significance of inviting all Indian diplomats to Delhi? Nothing major in Indian media about that.Thx

Nope. It was pre-planned months ago. This is a practice that MEA is trying to institutionalize. In the Mumbai aftermath, obviously the topic dominated the discussion. We will see some benefits from this meet in the near future but that part of the diplomacy is geared towards the long haul.

Well, a number of good pointers. Certainly hope that Chicom and SA are on board to whatever extent they can be - note that both also stand to lose much - in different ways perhaps. Assuming that a second attack had to be withdrawn, we still need to address the issue of Indian internal assists. That cannot be discounted. For instamce, D-Company in any form should be liquidated. These shady characters are a part of ISI and PA and need to be treated as such.

India is today infested with a host of terrorist insurgencies: JKLF, SIMI, ULFA, the PWG, the Maoists, the Naxalites, the Tripura TNA, the Naga terrorists, the Manipur terrorists et al. They can all be crushed quickly but for one factor: the support they get them from Pakistan and Bangladesh. Pakistan’s support is via the ISI, a wing of its army, which also fakes Indian currency to finance such activities.

Pakistani involvement is not because its civil society wants it, but because of the Islamic fervour in the army that is not reconciled to the defeat of its forces in Bangladesh.

The same fervour has turned the Bangladesh establishment against India, and hence with the help of the ISI, al Qaeda has through its Indonesian wing established a base to help these terrorists and also to develop the HuJI, which is emerging as the human infrastructure of terrorists in India. Thus, Islam is the heart and Pakistan is the brain of terrorism in India.

Challenging Islam in the realm of ideas, without diluting the debate with secular platitudes, jamming the brain of terror and destroying its human infrastructure embedded in India, is the core of a strategy to deter terrorism. This means sanitising Pakistan and truncating Bangladesh.

Prominent national security analysts have argued that in countering terrorist threats, deterrent strategies as formulated for conventional warfare have no significant role to play.

The US President’s National Security Strategy document states, “Traditional concepts of deterrence will not work against a terrorist enemy.” Of course, I am not concerned here with “traditional concepts” but with new ideas to combat the new form of warfare — clandestine violence under the name of terrorism.

The overwhelming consensus against the efficacy of deterrence has now been challenged by two US-based scholars, Robert Trager and Desseslava Zagorcheva [in Deterring Terrorism – It can be Done, International Security Journal (Harvard-MIT, Vol.30, No.3, 2006)]. According to them, the case against the use of deterrence strategies in counterterrorist campaigns appears to rest on three pillars.

First, terrorists are thought to be irrational, and therefore unresponsive to the cost-benefit calculation required in successful deterrence. Second, many terrorists are said to be so highly motivated that they are willing to die, and so not deterred by fear of punishment or of anything else.

Third, even if terrorists were afraid of punishment, they cannot be deterred because they lack or have a shifting “return address” on which retaliation can be visited. Counterterrorist strategies that advocate addressing “root causes” such as by “winning hearts and minds”, economic packages and promoting human rights, are for the long run. The required cure is for the short run.

Trager and Zagorcheva argue nevertheless that even the most highly motivated terrorists can be deterred by holding at risk the political goals of their patrons and financiers.

My view is that the ability of a terrorist-targeted nation to put political goals of the patrons of the terrorists and their benefactors at risk stands the best chance of deterring terrorism, and is the most important objective of counter-terrorism policy.

The structure of a counter-terrorism policy must be nation-specific and terrorist organisation-centric. There cannot be a general global strategy of deterrence against terrorism.

Traditional view of deterrence in strategic studies literature implies the scope for a bargain: both sides agree to cooperate on a state of affairs that both prefer to alternatives they face. This is called cost-benefit analysis.

Deterrence, therefore, is not just about making threats; it is also about making offers. Deterrence by punishment is about finding the right combination of threat and offer.

But it appears impossible that deterrence could hold at risk something of sufficient value to terrorists such that their behavior is affected. This means if the terrorists’ motivation is high enough, then even a small probability of a successful operation and a high probability of punishment will not deter them.

Further, because the interests of terrorists and the State seem so opposed, it appears impossible that the two sides could agree on a state of affairs that both prefer to that in which each does its worst against the other.

Terrorists are highly irrational by mainstream norms, but not completely. A growing body of literature shows that terrorist groups usually have lexicographically ordered goals and choose their strategy accordingly. States also have preferences over these same objectives.

The preference orderings of objectives of terrorists and States are diametrically opposed therefore the question of deterrence becomes crucial. Paradoxically, the high levels of motivation often make terrorists more susceptible to a deterrence strategy that targets their political goals.

Highly motivated terrorists, because they hold their political goals dear are reluctant to run even low level risks that hurt their political aims. This magnifies the coercive leverage of strategies that target political ends.

The Islamic terrorists in India have only one goal: to convert the Darul Harab India of today into the Darul Islam of tomorrow. Judging by the secret writings in circulation amongst clerics in Saudi Arabia, the Muslim clerics consider as unacceptable the failure of 800 years of Islamic rule in India to convert India into a 100 per cent Muslim nation.

Akhand Hindustan could not be converted more than 25 per cent. Thus, it was a passive victory of Hindus and a blow to the imagined invincibility of Islam.

Islamic theologists consider the US a meddling nation that is corrupting the social morals of Muslims; Israel represents a reversal of Islamic conquest of territory in West Asia by Jews who were hated by Prophet Mohammed; and Hindustan a challenge to the invincibility of Islam.

India has a huge population, and worse, has begun to develop quickly. Thus India must be targeted by terrorising Hindus and making them submit. The mad mullahs are thus on a rampage, and we Hindus have to wake up to the real challenge of Mumbai 26/11 and all that preceded it.

The first lesson to be learnt for tackling terrorism is that India recognise that the Hindu is the target, and that Muslims of South Asia are being programmed to slide into suicide against Hindus.

The recent al Qaeda videotapes in Bihar, seeking recruits for terrorism against the “US-Israel-India axis”, are an indication of this. It is to undermine the Hindu psyche and create fear of civil war that terror attacks are organised.

And since the Hindu is the target, Hindus must collectively respond as Hindus against the terrorist and not feel isolated, or worse be complacent because he or she is not personally affected. Therefore we have to have a collective mindset as Hindus to stand against the terrorist.

In this response, Muslims and Christians of India can join the Hindus if they genuinely feel for the Hindu. That they really do so feel cannot be believed unless they acknowledge with pride that though they may be Muslims or Christians, their ancestors are Hindus.

It is not easy for them to acknowledge this ancestry even though that is the truth, because the Muslim Mullah and Christian Missionary would consider it as unacceptable according to the Koran and the Bible.

That realisation of oneness with Hindus would also dilute the religious fervour of their faith and create a mental option for their possible re-conversion and return to Hinduism.

So, their religious leaders preach hatred and violence against the Kafir and the pagan, ie, the Hindu, to keep the faith of their followers.

But still, if any Muslim or Christian does so acknowledge his or her Hindu legacy, then we Hindus can accept him or her as a part of the Brihad Hindu Samaj, which constitutes Hindustan. India that is Hindustan is thus a nation of Hindus and those others whose ancestors are Hindus. Even Parsis and Jews in India have Hindu ancestors.

Those who refuse to so acknowledge or those foreigners who become Indian citizens by registration can remain in India, but should not have voting rights.

The second lesson is since demoralising the Hindu and undermining the Hindu foundation of India in order to destroy Hindu civilisation is the goal of terrorists, we must never capitulate and never concede any demand of terrorists.

Terrorists are encouraged by appeasement but never satisfied by it. Therefore, no matter how many Hindus have to die, the basic policy has to be: never yield to any demand of terrorists. That necessary resolve has not been shown in our recent history. Instead ever since we conceded Pakistan in 1947 under duress, we have been mostly yielding time and time again.

In 1989, to obtain the release of Mufti Mohammed Sayeed’s daughter Rubaiya who had been kidnapped, five terrorists in Indian jails were set free by the V P Singh government. To save Rubaiya it was not necessary to surrender to terrorist demands. But the then government was capitulationist in outlook, or perhaps the then Home Minister was in cahoots with the terrorists, and hence did not explore them.

The third lesson to be learnt is that however small the terrorist incident, the nation must retaliate — not by measured and “sober” responses but by massive retaliation. Our Intelligence agencies tell me in private that we have proof of terrorist training camps in PoK and Bangladesh, and if that is so, we should bomb them by dispatching our air force.

There is evidence that the FBI has presented to a district court in California of satellite photos that establish terror training camps exist near Balakot in northeast Pakistan. Indian government claims proof which has not been made public of 57 camps in Pakistani held territory and 36 camps in Bangladesh.

Many are advising Hindus to deal with the root “cause” of terrorism rather than eradicating terrorists by retaliation. And pray what is the root “cause”? According to liberals, terrorists are born or bred because of illiteracy, poverty, oppression, and discrimination. They argue that instead of eliminating them, the root cause of these four disabilities in society should be removed. Only then will terrorism disappear.

Liberals seek to deaden the emotive power of the individual and render him passive. A nation-state cannot survive for long with such a mentality. The background of some of the world’s most notorious Muslim terrorists shows that: Bin Laden, the son of a Saudi billionaire, studied engineering. His deputy Ayman al-Zawahri is an eye surgeon. The 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed graduated from an American college with an engineering degree. Flight 93 pilot Ziad Jarrah’s father is a Beirut bureaucrat who put his son through prep school. They didn’t do what they did to escape poverty.

Muslim fundamentalists have an education and an economic future, yet they still terrorise. They’re literate enough to liberally interpret their holy books, yet they still embrace jihad against Kafirs.The fourth lesson to learn is that more than the overt threat of the terrorists in India, the more sinister corrosion of our nation state occurs from within. This corrosion provides ‘a force multiplier’ to the terrorists.Ultimately our inference must be that terrorist masterminds have political goals and a method in their madness. An effective strategy to deter terrorism is therefore to defeat those political goals and to rubbish them by counterterrorist action.

Baljeet,If I was a paki, why would I allow an economically stronger India to re-group and re-arm, shouldn't I press for advantage right now ....... I don't get it.Yes, they amassed the troops on border, do they have a choice?

Milind There are some factors that are not working for pakis. First is their economy is tanked they have nothing to lose, they are becoming too smug in their success, they are ignoring the very fundamentals that have made them so successful in the past. Pakis are thinking "Garam Lohey par Chot Maro". What they are missing is the Indian Resilience, like Mao Once said, I can take millions of casualties how many can you take. Secondly regardless of their Madarsa Bravado they have very limited supply of Nuke Missiles. Their war reserve of ammunition may be robust due to the theft of American Supplies. They may have stocked upto one month of arty shells, bullets, rockets etc. Their other sense of false security comes from kargil where SSG group successfully raided and blew our Ammo dump in Kashmir. What they are not realizing is Indian Military Planners don't make the same mistake twice. Amassing troops on eastern border is a two fold game, it restores Paki Army Credibility that have taken severe beating from all the US Strikes, and they can unite their nation behind their common slogan, "Bharat ki tabahi". Second and very important aspect of this strategic move is it gives Unkil a free hand in hunting down taliban and Al keeda with impunity. Since they could not cooperate with America so openly they had to find an excuse to give what america wants, save Paki H&D, restore your credibility, put civilian government on leash. The American surge is in progress, US is sending their special forces teams with highly focussed missions. Since Americans don't have to worry about getting shot from Paki Khakis they will feel more confident in dealing with talli-bunnies and al keeda. You will soon see increased Drone attacks, more taliban killing. By the middle of next year pakis will receive a shot in the arm with $10 Billion package, their forces will move back into barracks, everything will become normal.

TSP had planned to move its remaining loyal troops from the NE where it was rapidly getting Talebanized, in conjunction with the Mumbai attack. This gives the army time to negotiate with the Talebs for a more orthodox Islamic regime which will return support of the military's agenda. This could be an interim stage in the formal buildup towards a hopeful incursion into India to wrest contol of Kashmir (Jehadi auto-pumping can overstretch the imagination and sense of capability). The Mumbai attack was simply a probe, to see how the Indian system reacts. A similar diversionary attack will take place again to see how quickly the IA can redeploy to face attacks from widely different positions. Depending on the outcome of the BD elections, the next diversionary attack is most likely in the east - this will be the most favourable spot since now Nepal, China, Indian Maoists, and BD protected Islamic/ethnic extremists can pull off quite a spectacular one.

Going by the recent events, war is certain. If not in the next few months, probably in the coming few years. One more attack on India and basically its game over for TSP. Events are at a tipping point right now. Was it sensed by the TSP that it had two death choices, either a slow death by internal implosion with taleban or a quick death by provoking india. World opinion and support has never been so one-sided in favour of India. GOI for once may be doing the right thing by secretly preparing for war whilst gaining time to gauge how Unkil et al will behave during wartime. Pakis are treading on dangerous times. I wont be surprised if Unkil fully sides with india in the event of war ( as indicated by Obama).

Former Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf, in his book In the Line of Fire stated that Sheikh was originally recruited by British intelligence agency, MI6, while studying at the London School of Economics. He alleges Omar Sheikh was sent to the Balkans by MI6 to engage in jihadi operations. Musharraf later went on to state, "At some point, he probably became a rogue or double agent".

What would be really neat is if we can get Mumbai victims to file suit in an American court against Pukistan for allowing the terrorist to launch from their soil. It will be a major blow to the puki H&D along with a financial blow ( 200 victims ~ 200 mil . 1 mil/ life lost ). And Paki assets in the US can be frozen if they do not comply.

The Pakistan government has failed to respond satisfactorily to India’s demands to convincingly end terrorism emanating from its soil and to hand over terrorist leaders and fugitives from Indian justice. Though both governments have toned down the political rhetoric and war clouds are no longer hovering on the horizon, the palpable anger of the people after the terror attacks on Mumbai has not been assuaged and a future conflict with Pakistan remains a possibility.Most analysts and commentators know that war is not a good option - it will add to the complexity of the challenge of cross-border terrorism without in any way helping to resolve it. Yet, there is widespread agreement that limited military measures and covert intelligence operations are necessary to raise the cost for the Pakistan Army and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) to wage a proxy war against India through terrorism. Unless some punishment is inflicted on the real perpetrators, they will not be persuaded to terminate their low risk-high payoff strategy to destabilise and weaken India by “bleeding it through a thousand cuts”.

The military measures that are actually adopted have to be carefully calibrated to ensure that escalation can be controlled short of all-out war. These include precision strikes by artillery, rocket and missile forces and air-to-ground strikes by fighter aircraft and attack helicopters against purely military targets in Pakistan-administered Kashmir so as to inflict punishment on the Pakistan Army, ISI and the leadership of the terrorist organisations acting against India. Special Forces raids will also be viable under certain circumstances. In case conventional conflict does break out, the endeavour should be to limit the fighting to the Line of Control in Kashmir so as to avoid risking escalation to nuclear levels.

There is, of course, some risk of conventional conflict spilling over from Kashmir to the plains. Though the Indian Army and Air Force still enjoy an edge over their Pakistani counterparts despite the slow pace of modernisation and numerous operational deficiencies, Pakistan may choose to escalate the conflict for political reasons. The Pakistani armed forces have received considerable aid from the United States to fight the so-called global war on terror but are in no shape to successfully fight a war with India because of their large-scale commitment in the NWFP, FATA and Swat Valley and because of the recent battering that they have received at the hands of militant groups like the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

If conventional conflict does spill over to the plains, India’s army and air force will plan to take the fight into enemy territory through their new concept of joint air-land offensive operations. This has been tested in a series of annual exercises that have included Poorna Vijay (2001), Vijay Chakra, Divya Astra, Vajra Shakti (May 2005), Desert Strike (November 2005), Sanghe Shakti (May 2006) and Dakshin Shakti-Brazen Chariots (March 2008). All of these exercises were aimed at concentrating and coordinating the firepower of all available assets and fine-tuning army-air force joint operations in a strategic setting premised on conventional operations in a nuclear environment.

The doctrine for offensive operations prior to Operation Parakram (2001-02) was to employ the massive combat potential of India’s Strike Corps to advance deep into Pakistani territory to capture strategic objectives and to bring to battle and destroy Pakistan’s Army Reserve (North) and Army Reserve (South), so as to substantially degrade its war machinery. This concept was evolved in 1981-82 and tested in Exercise Digvijay when General Krishna Rao was army chief. It was further refined during the famous Exercise Brass Tacks IV in 1987 by General K. Sundarji as chief of the army staff and was accepted as the army’s doctrine for offensive operations in the plains.

While the option to strike deep and call Pakistan’s nuclear bluff remains on the table, a new concept of offensive operations now under consideration is a combination of “cold start” and integrated battle groups (IBGs). During Operation Parakram the Strike Corps had taken too long to move to their concentration areas. The aim of Cold Start is to move rapidly from the cantonments directly to battle positions to launch a number of potent strikes all across the western border without prior warning to give India strategic advantage. IBGs based on combinations of infantry divisions and armoured brigades are offensive battle groups capable of penetrating across the border over a wide front. Supported by massive firepower, IBGs can launch multi-pronged offensive operations into Pakistan without presenting large targets for nuclear strikes.

India’s strike formations are now better capable of launching offensive operations quickly. Within 72 to 96 hours of the issue of the order for full-scale mobilisation, a large number of IBGs based on strike divisions may be expected to launch offensive operations even as the defensive divisions are still completing their deployments on the border. Such simultaneity of operations will unhinge the adversary, break his cohesion and paralyse him into making mistakes from which he will not be able to recover.

Each strike division battle group will be specifically structured to achieve designated objectives in the terrain in which it is expected to be launched and yet be flexible enough for two or more of them to be grouped for concentrated operations under a corps HQ. This will enable them to bring to bear the combined weight of their combat power on a common military objective deep inside Pakistani territory. The “pivot” or holding Corps has been provided significant offensive capability that is now integral to them. The then army chief, General J.J. Singh, had stated that “they have been assigned roles, which are offensive as well as defensive…”

Should the Pakistan army find itself unable to stop the Indian juggernaut, it may consider launching nuclear strikes against India’s mechanised forces operating inside its territory. However, Pakistan has a lot to lose by initiating nuclear strikes. Its military leaders are well aware that while India will sustain considerable damage in a Pakistani first strike, India’s massive retaliatory strike will completely destroy major Pakistani cities, industry and combat forces and Pakistan will cease to exist as a nation state.

Under the circumstances, Pakistan’s “red lines” are not as close to the border as the Pakistan army has been trying to convince Indian military planners to believe. Obviously, the red lines vary according to the terrain. For example, in the developed state of West Punjab, Pakistan’s nuclear threshold will be much lower than in the Cholistan or Thar deserts, which are relatively less developed and, consequently, more thinly populated.

The nuclear tipping point in a conventional conflict is a matter of fine military judgement. A rational Pakistani approach would be to opt for a graduated response in case push comes to shove. Lt Gen Sardar F.S. Lodhi (Retd) has written about a demonstration warning shot followed by a low-yield nuclear explosion over Indian forces advancing inside Pakistani territory. If that fails to stop Indian offensive operations, Pakistan may choose to target a small border town in India. However, it will risk total annihilation.

In the end, India’s conventional superiority will prevail and a future conflict in the plains may be expected to end on terms favourable to India. Hence, while war is not a rational option, there is no need to fear war and act timidly. India must act in its national interest and not continue to suffer the adverse consequences of Pakistan’s interminable proxy war.

(28.12.2008 - Gurmeet Kanwal is Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi. He can be contacted at kanwal.gurmeet@gmail.com)

Just give me one answer, what is the Indian response to terror attacks. chose any one from the Reference list thread.

We did not even call the Bluff of bafoon Bill on his foreword to Madam Secretary book where in he alleges Hindu Militants killed Sikhs in Jammu.Then proceed with your pompus analysis. what could have happened, why is it happening etc put those kind of conclusions where they belong. Just tell me what have we done to TSP pigs.Thanks in advance. and I await to at your answers.Regards

Unfortunately, the political and diplomatic response to the attacks seem to be going as I had expected. Mostly incoherent (literally and figuratively), out of tune mumbling and babbling by PM, Min of Ext Affairs, Min of Defence, Min of Home etc. We will retaliate, we will not, we will after the next attack, Pakistan must do more, purely Non state actors, Non state actors with state support etc.

India's TSP policy should factor in the following realities.

1) The U.S. will enter into "strategic" partnerships with India if it senses economic profits. These partnerships are vertical specific (nuclear, defence supplies etc) and are not equivalent to the level it has with Israel and the U.K.

2) The U.S. will continue to gift (free) military hardware to TSP. But the U.S. will turn around and sell to India at an exorbitant amount. Gifting arms to TSP is the U.S. reflex reaction in hopes of "keeping" leverage over the TSP army. The U.S. will use this leverage if its interests matter but no so much where India's interests matter.

3) China and Saudi Arabia are not India's friends. Good for Chai, Biskoot and nothing more. Instead they are "all weather friends of TSP".

India's should think about the following course going forward. This is not heart warming for the average Jingo on BRF but it is the most practical.

1) India should continue to focus on economic development but keep the powder dry.

2) Embark on a massive buildup to extend the advantage India's navy and air force already have (already planned new aircraft carriers, subs, MRCA, Phalcons + accelerate purchase and induction of new 155mm artillery, Arjuns etc). Special focus on a massive inventory of precision missiles such as Brahmos (land attack, anti ship), Agni II's). Numbers in the 100's to sustain a 10 day shock and awe campaign.

3) Announce a quid pro quo in all imported defence deals i.e. if U.S. Russia, France, U.K. want a piece of the multi-billion $ hard currently action in India they have to contractually commit to not selling or giving away similar weapons to TSP. Demonstrate and assert soft power. $1 trillion+ ($4 trillion+ on PPP basis) economy growing at 8%+ at the worst of times is nothing to sneeze at. The U.S, Western Europe can decide if they want to give away weapons to TSP free or if they want to sell their wares at a profit and be on the right side of the 4th largest economy, largest democracy in the world.

4) India should proactively bring up Kashmir issue instead of avoiding it. Instruct every diplomatic mission to give interviews to the local media that India is as eager as TSP to solve the issue. Kashmir is disputed territory and is being illegaly occupied by TSP and about 1/3rd of it (Akasi Chin) has been illegally ceded to China. Publicize the 61% voting record in the recent elections. Bring out a dossier of attacks on civilian, economic and democratic institutions since the early days insurgency - the systematic assasinations, kidnapings of political leaders, business people, heads of state owned PSU's (HMT etc). Counter the nonsense that emnates from "western security experts" - ask them if they want Kashmir to evolve into a secular, progressive society as the rest of India of if they want this to become another talibanized terror swamp such as NWFP, Swat, FATA etc. A sane person's choice would be clear.

BTW, Kashmir is/should be a trilateral issue - TSP, India and China as China is occupying Aksai Chin. The goal should be to drag the comrades into the mud. China should realize that they will pay a economic price by being part of this "most dangerous" place in the world. They cannot and should not go scott free. I think TSP's belligerence will be melt away once the comrades either try to distance themselves from the problem or squeeze TSP's nuts to "let it go". If it takes 50 years to arrive at a settlelment so be it but China should be made part of the problem.

5) Consistently call out the fact that the world's worst nightmare has come true "Terrorists have gained access to nuclear weapons and are resorting to nuclear blackmail" for a decade now. Make sure the media hypenates TSP-ISI-Taliban-Al Qaeda. The ISI has its finger on nuclear weapons. ISI = Taliban = Al Qaeda have nuclear weapons.

6) Consistently draw a distinction between 'the people and the civilian leadership' of Pakistan and the ISI-Taliban. "We have no quarrels with the people and civilian govt of Pakistan" we know they love India, we love them too and we want to make peace but what to do "they are not in control". Who can we negotiate with" etc. We want to talk but can't talk to terrorists. Pay lip service and let the civilian and military leadership fight it out for control. We dont care who is in control (it will always be the TSP army) but the entire world should know about and the Army should not be able to hide behind the civilian facade.

7) Getting into a land war with TSP will be costly in terms of men. I dont care if we burn $100 billion on a war with TSP but I do care about the human cost. Per (2) above the next terror attack should follow a well set drill.

7a) No statements from anybody (state or central) govt functionary as the attack unfolds.

7b) A brief press release that "India will take time to investigate who is behind it. We are not into knee jerk reactions. Who ever did this are enemies of peace etc". No blaming TSP. Stay absolutely calm.

7c) 12-24 hours after the situation is resolved and once GOI is able to get a single intercept or a minute piece of evidence about TSP's invovlement unleash a massive (20 - 30) missile strike against the ISI head quarters. The PM should go on national television and readout a statement but we got evidence and we have struck at the terrorists and enemies of peace. We love the people and govt of Pakistan. This is an attack against terrorists and the ordinary citizens of Pakistan have nothing to worry about blah blah. If TSP has concerns about GOI's war on terror we are willing to meet and discuss etc. Any further escalations from TSP will bring about massive disproportionate retalation etc.

Put the onus of escalation on TSP. If they choose to escalate, unleash the IAF and Navy and hit their weakspots. Dont make any moves on land. Mobilize the troops and have them enforce the sanctity of international border. It will be TSP's call to go up the escalatory ladder. The TSP general's love their whisky too much to resort to nuclear war.

No talk of nuclear war, red lines blue lines etc. One surprise, massive jhapad and ISI HQ is turned into shambles and before TSP can react the usual used car, snake oil salesmen in the west will be making the rounds in Slumbad asking TSP to not escalate etc.

If MMS is any smart he could have used the pretext of attacks on Jewish population of India as genocide part 2 and use Isaraeli help to mount counter attacks on TSP terror central. I am assuming the PM cares two hoots for Indian citizens as he said TSP is also a victim of terrorism! Who is terrorising TSP? I fondly ask.I had predicted way back in 1999 that home grown terror card will be played by TSP very soon. Recall the same super duper analysts accusing me of whe LKg did not share ISI activities with Indians but with "Western Diplomats".

we have no end game strategy for TSP nor do we take seriously the irrational actions of TSP we just wish them away.

There is complete Psycological profile of our Super Dumb leadership with all intelligence agencies (except our own) and we are sooo predictable that after every shock treatment meeted to us there comes along a super duper analyst to tell us why it happened, what could be the reasons and finally why we should not act and wait for the next.

Last edited by John Snow on 29 Dec 2008 08:53, edited 1 time in total.

For India to "attack" it takes some 3 weeks to decide, then another three weeks to mobilize. Now, all Prez Z has to do is a Mush - give a u-turn speech and India is (againn) checkmated.

India needs a 24x7 MKI on watch. The moment a verifiable attack occurs, the MKIs take off.

Having said that I do not think they will stop attacks, attacks will get more and more complicated (specially for an Indian politco). How can attacks stop when their sole mentality is to Islamise India?

More attacks are in the works for sure. TSPA WANTS a shooting war on terms it thinks it can control. In 2002, it took 6 months gestation period for Kaluchak to happen. Today the period is shorter. The only issue is when not if.

At this point, Pakistan seems to have pulled off their blackmail on "moving troops from western borders" and also raised the nuclear bogey - they have also rejected all the evidence that the US/UK seem to have shared with them.

There is something that I am missing here - and I haven't quite been able to grasp it even after thinking about possibilities every day.

The US has been paying the Pakistani army toa) Attack the Talibanb) Let US convoy's through

The Pakistani army has been paying the Taliban toa) Not attack the Pakistani armyb) Let US convoy's through

The net result is that the Taliban have been letting convoys though, they have not been attacking the Pakistan army, the army has not been attacking them, and both the Pakistan army and the Taliban are sharing money from the US.

I am guessing that if convoys are attacked while the Pakarmy in in the area, the US will blame Pakistan. So for convoys to be attacked, the Pakistan army must move out of the way using some excuse. War with India would have been a good excuse and as per Gen Raghavan (on TV last night) the Mumbai attacks were part of that strategy.

With India not waging war the Pakistan army has few choices

1) Moving troops to the East anyway using war hysteria as an excuse. but the US will be watching Indian movements and will know when India is going to attack and will sound off Pakistan and warn India. This has not happened.

2) It can provoke war with another dastardly attack on a soft target in India

In either case Pakistan is stuck with having to keep huge forces in the West. Moving those forces without a good excuse means no money fro the Pakistan army and the Taliban.

The US have thought of attempting to pay off and strike deals with the Taliban. Ask the Taliban to let US supplies through while blaming India and allowing the Pakistani army and anti-India forces to continue to bleed India. This is an attractive choice provided the Taliban can be bought off.

But the US supplies to Afghanistan are, ultimately being used against the Taliban in Afghanistan and those Afghani Taliban are stuck in Pakistan as a result of that. In effect the US is paying the Taliban to stay out of Afghanistan, stay in Pakistan. Now the Us may be looking at allowing those forces to wage war against India as "freedom fighters".

This will go down well only with the Jaish e Mohammad. The Pashtuns whose homelands are seeing US attacks will not be satisfied with this. and they will keep attacking the US. The Pakistani army does not want any role in this, but unless they play a role they will not get paid by the US.

The Pakistan army would prefer to let the Taliban have NWFP/FATA as long as they do not spill over into mainland Pakistan. The Lal Masjid action was part of the Paki army's strategy to keep the Taliban in FATA/NWFP. For decades Pakistan has managed a relationship with the tribes there and would like to continue that.

The trump card here -appears to be radical Islam.

Ultimately the war will be a war against radical Islam. The sooner everyone - including India and the US admit this fundamental fact the better it will be. Up until now I have seen only pussyfooting and lack of open recognition of plain and simple radical Islam as the problem.

War against radical Islam will have to be fought - with all its attendant complications across the world. But I would liek to see Pakistan taken over by radical Islam first - so the world can really get a taste of radical Islam. The Mumbai attacks were only an appetiser.

More attacks are in the works for sure. TSPA WANTS a shooting war on terms it thinks it can control. In 2002, it took 6 months gestation period for Kaluchak to happen. Today the period is shorter. The only issue is when not if.

That may be, but I get the feeling that we do not want a shooting war at this time because all the new and improved weapons are in development (ATV, ABM, A-5, Shourya, Nag) or low rate production (SU-30, Brahmos, Agni-1, Pinaka). Plus there has been no articulation of Indian aims in a shooting war. We may never know but the response to Mumbai could be to absorb more attacks in order to play for time to build up to a time when we are ready in terms of plans and materials.

Dear everyone I haven't gone through all the extensive posts, my interest is very basic: 4 weeks down the line where do we stand. Pakistan is not delivering rather threatening for a full scale nuke war, US is not helping (or rather finding way out of Afghan) then what choices are left with us, what is happening to investigations, have they completed it?Please excuse me if I sound navie for a defence forum.

That may be, but I get the feeling that we do not want a shooting war at this time because all the new and improved weapons are in development (ATV, ABM, A-5, Shourya, Nag) or low rate production (SU-30, Brahmos, Agni-1, Pinaka). Plus there has been no articulation of Indian aims in a shooting war. We may never know but the response to Mumbai could be to absorb more attacks in order to play for time to build up to a time when we are ready in terms of plans and materials.

That proves the fact we have been sitting on our behinds since 1998, assumimg TSP to change its behaviour.

We fight war with what we have, imagine IG asking LCA to be developed, or OFB develop Indian field Gun for us to take on TSP in 1971.

With due apologies to Winston ( I am no fan of his but he was a leader to his country)

Quote:

Every moron in Delhi brought forth a ignoble chance to make moneyAnd every chance the moron brought forth a noble knights death

After delivering a stirring speech on BBC radio, he is said to have said all we have to fight the germans with is beer cans!

You can modify the below to Indian situation and lead India even in Heleium inhaled voice, the nation will follow. If babus cant write a speech atleast Plagiarize MMS favorite masters the British.

Quote:

This is not a question of fighting for Danzig (Islamabad) or fighting for Poland (Baluchistan). We are fighting to save the whole world from the pestilence of Nazi (Islamic Militant )tyranny and in defense of all that is most sacred to man. This is no war of domination or imperial aggrandizement or material gain; no war to shut any country out of its sunlight and means of progress. It is a war, viewed in its inherent quality, to establish, on impregnable rocks, the rights of the individual, and it is a war to establish and revive the stature of man.

Dear everyone I haven't gone through all the extensive posts, my interest is very basic: 4 weeks down the line where do we stand. Pakistan is not delivering rather threatening for a full scale nuke war, US is not helping (or rather finding way out of Afghan) then what choices are left with us, what is happening to investigations, have they completed it?Please excuse me if I sound naive for a defence forum.

I'll tell you my personal opinion - imagining that I am a benevolent dictator of India looking after indian interests.

I don't like Pakistan, but I respect its method. Pakistan has refined the art of attacking India in a way that keeps it from being attacked in revenge. The fact is Pakistan is powerful enough to make war costly for India without allowing a final solution to be settled once for all.

So what can I, as Sultan of India do?

1) I am going to avoid war for now. Apart from being inconclusive - the US is likley to pass on intelligence and arms to Pakistan to keep Paksitan afloat

2) I will accept that Pakistan is not a normal state, acknowldege that it is a failing state being taken over by radical Islam, and say openly that radical Islam is not good and that fighting radical islam is not a war against Muslims

3) I will resolve to increase funding for Indian armed forces to the extent that is necessary for a nation of the size and population that I govern. The armed forces should be ready to crush Pakistan with relative ease some years down the road

4) I wil start calling a spade a spade and stop sops to Pakistan and protest or even blacklist nations who deal with Pakistan. With India economy growing nations like Sweden and France should be warned not to supply sophisticated arms to Pakistan

5) I will improve internal security and governance to try and remove the criminals from my own governmental apparatus.

Dr. Shiv, the Indian public cannot escape the blame. It is very easy to sit in front of TVs or computers, blaming everything on the GOI. From 1990 the Indian Public has not given a strong mandate to the GOI. Can the Indian Public for once give GOI a mandate and no Jayalalithas or Mamta Bannerjees or Mayawatis! When people vote for parties like CPI, BSP, SP do they not deserve the government they vote!!

Before anything can happen, we need to vote in a government (of a single party) that will abrogate Article 370, divide Kashmir into the states of Kashmir, Jammu and Laddakh.

That means that we are only 4 weeks from the next attack. Tough Diplomatic Demarches and Tuxedos are being prepared with Terminological Exactitude. First-class air tickets have been reserved for Dilli Billis to visit Tonga to ask the King there to intercede with the King of Sweden to please mention to the King of Saudi Arabia on his next sightseeing visit to Sweden, to please mention to the Pakistani President that India does not want war, but is there some way to postpone the next attack until May 22.

Hillary Clinton is buying Advance Purchase excursion fare tickets on Delta Airlines to fly New York - Islamabad - Dilli - Dacca for High Level Discussions to show how serious the USA is in Fighting the Global Offensive Against Terror.

You are not satisfied with all this hectic activity? All over a couple of hundred Indians dying?

(Seriously, I do believe that you need to change ur user handle. May I suggest "Parvejastra" (loose translation: Mijjile-e-Pervez)

Can anyone on BR, however jingoistic we are, with a straight face claim that TSP has not 'won' so far? They sure have diverted all attention from the horrific Mumbai slaughter to 'nuclear flashpoint' and 'tension between South Asian rivals'; all according to their gameplan.

Now, its a bit naive and ultra-defensive for India to claim that TSP is whipping up war hysteria. What else was expected? After all, India also said 'all options are open'; even her majesty MMS's super boss said so. This was exactly what TSP was looking for and challenged India to cross the finish line, and then under Chanakyan guise, India backed off much to the disappointment of TSP and its western supporters who were looking for some entertainment pass time (earning big bucks in the process) mediating between the 'rivals' and 'resolving Kashmir'.

I take some optimisim from R-man's analysis that some maneuvering is going on. I also spoke to some ex military generals at a party here in B'lore yesterday. They tell me that given the state TSP is in, the least cost and most effective option would be to have USA on our side, and actually put some teeth, economic/military toy sanctions on TSP. They are sure that all this talk of surgical strikes bla bla is a cart load of horse manure. From the first shot that is fired, it is total war. And finally, they tell me that TSPA, full of Jihadis, are furiously motivated, ready to go to their 72 in a heartbeat fighting India. Bottom line: from my vantage point here in Bangalore, talking & interacting with any # of informed Indians (unscientific opinion/data gathering I might add), it is clear that Indians do not want war, they feel 'international community' pressure on TSP is the best option.

Unkil I am sure has sensed this and hence driving a hard bargain with India to deliver if at all.

More attacks are in the works for sure. TSPA WANTS a shooting war on terms it thinks it can control. In 2002, it took 6 months gestation period for Kaluchak to happen. Today the period is shorter. The only issue is when not if.

Shouldn't this thread be called :Improving Peace Lusting India's Non-responses to Terror.

When such big players like America the supreme and Pakistan the cunning are playing in our neighborhood, should we not just keep our heads down and not ruffle the automatic self-destruction the two are engaged in? Should we just send more BSF jawans to the border, a few more to Kashmir and a lot more ATFs, thus ensuring that irrespective of which bomb happens to fall on our land there is a cent percent chance that none of ours will fall there and all the Indian Terrorists will be caught?

Dr. Shiv, the Indian public cannot escape the blame. It is very easy to sit in front of TVs or computers, blaming everything on the GOI. From 1990 the Indian Public has not given a strong mandate to the GOI. Can the Indian Public for once give GOI a mandate and no Jayalalithas or Mamta Bannerjees or Mayawatis! When people vote for parties like CPI, BSP, SP do they not deserve the government they vote!!

Before anything can happen, we need to vote in a government (of a single party) that will abrogate Article 370, divide Kashmir into the states of Kashmir, Jammu and Laddakh.

I understand your angst, but what I would like to see is a situation in which every politician, no matter what party, has the basic sense of nationalism to ensure that national interest is not undermined in favor of regional or communal interest.

Your argument is that the voters should vote in such people. My argument is that any leader who is voted in should have the basic minimum sense of nationalism to avoid dilution of national interest.

I disagree with you idea of division of J& K though. That would be the creation of a Muslim majority state next to the border with Pakistan or Pashtunistan. Not a good idea, given India's recent history.